I received sage advice to consider replacing a set of Optilock rings on a Sako 85 rifle I recently acquired. Based on a quick search of posts on this forum, it appears that I can safely replace them with a set of Talley rings. That said, I wonder what Optilock weaknesses are? Any personal experience will be appreciated.

That said, I wonder what Optilock weaknesses are? Any personal experience will be appreciated.

1) First, I'd say the big thing for me was that the Allen head, ring clamp screws are VERY soft. If your not extremely careful, you can round out slot easily. A harder torx head screw seems to me would be superior.

2) Even the low Opti's are a little too high for a moderately sized scope objective. I concluded that Opti's were made to facilitate a 50mm objective, or higher. I, on the other hand, prefer smaller scope objectives on my hunting rifles.

3) Lastly, price. I paid roughly $135.00 for a set of Opti's for a Sako 75. For me, it just wasn't justified.

I think Beretta was charging $13 for replacement screws I noted earlier. Just seemed like too much, for too little.

I do think the limiter pin slot and the dove tail design they have is a stable one.

I'd buy the sage that advised you to ditch them for Tally's a beer, I think.

Cheaptrick and bugsNbows, I sincerely thank you for your replies. The Optilocks that came with the rifle are 1" ringmounts, not the separate base/rings set. I have another Sako that has a 30 mm set of the separate base/rings. It has a Kahles cl 1.5-6x42 scope and I used it for four or five years without a problem. Being a 338 Federal caliber, the recoil energy is about 20, and I haven't fired it more than a few hundred rounds. Since my data set of ONE sample is relatively meaningless, I wanted to hear about the experiences of others.

I plan to put a VX-3, 1.75-6x32, heavy duplex reticle, on the rifle. My goal is to take it black bear hunting next May.

It's funny... when it comes to Optiloks, I really like the 1-piece "ringmount" design, but absolutely detest the 2 piece OL mounts with the separate bases. I think the former is a good design, but the latter is a lousy design for the reasons already stated. If you have the OL Ringmounts, I'd keep them. To me, when you already have integral dovetails machined into the receiver, they are your base and you don't need a separate base.

I'd keep the rings you already have. The only disadvantage I know of the OL ringmounts are that they're expensive. They might also have the soft screws, but you can replace the screws. I like the fact they have the self-centering polymer ring inserts, so they grip the scope well, don't bind the scope, and don't produce any ring marks.

If your rifle came with the 2-piece Optiloks, I'd ditch them in favor of the Talleys... or buy a set of the ringmounts.

Ted

Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.

As regards 2 piece OL mounts with the separate bases, I have one of those from my 2006 purchase of an 85S in 338 Federal and I concur with your point of view on them. The combo is so high that I had to use a comb raising kit that I tailored to the rifle/scope combination to get acceptable cheek weld and rapid alignment with the optical axis of the scope.
The comb raising kit isn't aesthetically pleasing, but a few years of use proved them to be effective and stable.

My recent 85 came with a 1" "ringmount". I will take your advice and try them with the 32mm objective.

Again,
thank you.Your answer is an important example
of how the experience of others can make us personally wiser, and it brings the
following to mind.

A
new topic initiates a member's request for other members to explain something
or to share experiences that can help him/her make an effective decision or
decisions.IMO, the members
of the Optics Talk Forum offer an amazing array of talent that can provide advice
ranging from theoretical explanations to practical experience.

I wish I knew how to personally say this to
everyone, but for the privilege of membership, I thank the moderators, other members,
and SWFA for accepting me as a participant in this impressive group.

Again,
thank you.Your answer is an important example
of how the experience of others can make us personally wiser, and it brings the
following to mind.

A
new topic initiates a member's request for other members to explain something
or to share experiences that can help him/her make an effective decision or
decisions.IMO, the members
of the Optics Talk Forum offer an amazing array of talent that can provide advice
ranging from theoretical explanations to practical experience.

I wish I knew how to personally say this to
everyone, but for the privilege of membership, I thank the moderators, other members,
and SWFA for accepting me as a participant in this impressive group.

Nicely stated Sir!

If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat? Anomymous

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum